Slashdot Mirror
DOJ Reaches Settlement On Publication of Files About 3D Printed Firearms (joshblackman.com)
He Who Has No Name writes: Those who remember Cody Wilson and Defense Distributed -- the self-described cryptoanarchist and his organization that published plans for 3D printable firearm parts, respectively -- also remember that not long after the plans for the printable Liberator single-shot pistol hit the web, the Department of State seized the Defense Distributed website and prohibited Wilson from publishing 3D printable firearm plans, claiming violations of ITAR -- the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, a U.S. law taxing and restricting the distribution of a wide variety of physical goods listed as having military value. Slashdot covered the website seizure here (the Department of Defense was initially misreported in sources to have been the agency responsible).
In both a First and Second Amendment win, the Second Amendment Foundation has settled with the Department of State after suing on behalf of Defense Distributed. Slashdot reader schwit1 shares an excerpt from the report: "Under terms of the settlement, the government has agreed to waive its prior restraint against the plaintiffs, allowing them to freely publish the 3-D files and other information at issue. The government has also agreed to pay a significant portion of the plaintiffs' attorney's fees, and to return $10,000 in State Department registration dues paid by Defense Distributed as a result of the prior restraint. Significantly, the government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber -- including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms -- are not inherently military."
In both a First and Second Amendment win, the Second Amendment Foundation has settled with the Department of State after suing on behalf of Defense Distributed. Slashdot reader schwit1 shares an excerpt from the report: "Under terms of the settlement, the government has agreed to waive its prior restraint against the plaintiffs, allowing them to freely publish the 3-D files and other information at issue. The government has also agreed to pay a significant portion of the plaintiffs' attorney's fees, and to return $10,000 in State Department registration dues paid by Defense Distributed as a result of the prior restraint. Significantly, the government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber -- including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms -- are not inherently military."
Finally, a good reason to get that 3D printer!
This is great news for the school-shooting industry. I expect that the NRA and Second Amendment activists are thrilled at having these new tools to murder children.
Yeah, because the existing AR-15 and similar weapons which are readily available all across the country are no match for these plastic super weapons, which on a good day, may be able to fire one bullet without exploding and killing the shooter!
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
Wild hyperbole like that is why fewer and fewer people take the Left seriously about anything any more.
Information wants to be free.
The Government re-categorized common small arms to no longer fall under ITAR, but instead be regulated by standard Dept. of Commerce international trade regulations.
Since ITAR no longer applies to Defense Distributed, the case is over.
But it's just an administrative policy change. The next administration could swap it back at any time. It needs Congress to pass a law protecting blueprints and plans, or for the Supreme Court to decide a case in favor of the First Amendment to prevent future victims.
There is an expanding Open Source Space community. You can meet them at the upcoming Open Source Cubesat Workshop. This is actually an interesting precedent for us, because satellites and various space technologies are also "munitions" under ITAR or EAR, both laws have a carve-out for Open Source, and here it has been tested.
Second-amendment issues are out-of-scope for most space research organizations, so nothing said about that.
Bruce Perens.
What a fucking douche. There are millions of people who own firearms and don't shoot children. There are drivers who intentionally run over children. Are you going to forbid kit car plans because someone might use them for killing children? There are legitimate uses of a weapon. Self defense, hunting (legalized and regulated), sport (skeet shooting), and of course on the firing range.
You and your fucking comment are as sick as the deranged asswipes who shoot at innocent people, children included. Fucking retard.
>"Of course guns are military. What a stupid thing to say. Thanks, Trump!"
? The article said:
"The government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber -- including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms -- are not inherently military."
And that is 100% true. It didn't say "guns are military" or "guns are not military", they said that non-automatic firearms UP TO .50 caliber are not INHERENTLY military (IE, exclusively for military use).
Chill out, this has nothing to do with Trump. There is a difference between a military rifle and a sporting rifle sold to civilians. Just because something looks like a military weapon, doesn't make it so.
That was a really interesting concession, because otherwise the government would've run afoul of U.S. v. Miller, which found that gun control was not a violation of rights if the weapon in question was not militarily useful.
For the upper receiver, sure. The lower receiver houses the trigger group, mag release, and a few other things that don't operate under the firing pressure. Would I trust current filament with this? Maybe, maybe not. I still like that the plans are out, though.
I agree. Even though school shootings are down, and there are 10-100 times as many people that protect themselves with guns as their are victims of gun crimes, we can't take the chance that even one child gets hurt.
While we're at it, we also need to ban the anonymous internet. Those hackers are too dangerous to be allowed to operate invisibly, not to mention all the potential hate speech and Russian fake news that might harm the fragile minds of our children. All internet users will be required to register with the government, which will review their speech and activities online to determine if they are safe users. A large series of firewalls will be established to prevent an unapproved content from being viewed.
Perhaps we can attach this to some sort of "social behavior" score, and better protect our children by preventing rude and wrong-thinking internet users from being able to travel, get jobs, or otherwise participate in society.
Also, we can tax memes to prevent children from being influenced by those evil dens of darkness like reddit or *shudder* /pol/.
I'm guessing no one told the OP of this tread that you can download free PDFs of all metal machine pistols off of the web off of random public and open websites. Such as http://thehomegunsmith.com/
I can see it now, pissed off guy wants to go on a shooting spree.
Order 3d printer on amazon after hours of research, forgot to order filament, order filament, open cad, sketch rifle, does a horrible job, searches internet for a pattern, downloads pattern, load pattern into 3d printer, hit print, hours later, realizes he has wrong filament, re-order filament, printer pauses ruining print, try printing again, platter not cold enough and ruins print, platter to hot and melts print, after 2 dozen tries, gets a good print. Realizes he needs bullets, drives to sporting store buys bullets. Takes gun into woods, gun shoots 1 bullet at a time due to stress, gun jams, gun breaks after 4 bullets.
Queue up another print job to print replacement gun, repeat, while waiting for his 3rd print, subscribes to 3d printer forums.
Over a month late, finally gets a good prototype gun printed, forgets why he was mad, and starts printing 3d printed boats.
Not only does it make people not respect the political left, it also makes it much more obvious how blatantly anti-American leftism and leftists happens to be. Like it or not, the right to bear firearms is a core part of Americanism. If you stand against the right of Americans to bear arms then you're standing against America and what it means to be American. This shouldn't surprise us, of course. Leftism is a foreign ideology from Europe. It has no traditional ties to America, and that's why leftism is so fundamentally incompatible with what it means to be American.
That was a curious ruling in itself, given that at the founding of the United States, the expectation was that most warships would be in private hands rather than government. That's why the Constitution includes a provision for issuing Letters of Marque and Reprisal to charter private citizens to conduct warfare on its behalf.
Imagine that 10 years from now there are 3D printers that print really strong metal parts which can be assembled into a machine gun or similar. Then what? Just because today's printers can only build crappy one-shot plastic guns doesn't mean that tomorrow's printers won't be able to print far more dangerous DIY weapons.
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
Not to mention serving as a deterrent for invasion. The AR-15 may not be the best of sniper rifles, especially the lower cal variants but occupation would certainly be uncomfortable with a dozen snipers along every street. This isn't like Iraq or Afghanistan where they could be anywhere, in the US they ARE everywhere.
"Only in USA is an AR-15 "not inherently military"
Only on slashdot would a victory for non-military firearms be considered a win for the second amendment - the purpose of which is to keep military arms in private possession.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The government has also agreed to pay a significant portion of the plaintiffs' attorney's fees
What about the rest of it? A significant portion leaves this chap out-of-pocket for doing something that has now been declared to be perfectly legal; at the very least he should be made whole for any costs incurred.
Plus compensation for inconvenience and so forth, but that's a separate issue.
If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
Exactly. The AR-15 was in fact made in collaboration with the military. Honestly, don't these people think our actual military is slightly better qualified than the secretary of state to determine what is and is not a military firearm?
For those who aren't aware, there was a major revision to the list of military weapons by Secretary Clinton which triggered ITAR authority. There was also a coinciding adjustment to ATF regulations regarding gun manufacturing, hopefully this has or will be revised as well. The combination created a situation where a seller so much as adding a scope to a purchased AR-15 was considered to be engaging in gun manufacture and required to submit to regulation under ITAR as an international arms manufacturer, the fee was something like $10,000 AND ITAR was ordered to disregard the applications.
Actually, it is not.
The military doesn't use the AR-15.
That's a very good point. But with our defense budget, I felt the counter arguments would be strong so I left he whole "armed citizenry" argument off my list. I agree with you though.
(yes, assault rifles are a real thing. It's got to do with the speed of the bullet and how it tears through flesh leaving a wide hole).
I'm sorry, your ignorance is showing... This is simply not true.
When did Winnie the Pooh get so political...?
That is true. The Armalite 15 (AR-15) was originally designed as a commercial sporting rifle in the 1950s. Colt liked the design well enough that they bought the patent and reworked the fire control group and upper receiver to make it 'select fire'. Mean it could be either normal semi-auto or full auto. Some of the parts are interchangeable, but the fire control is still regulated as a machine gun.
Except that the majority of Americans do not believe in unlimited gun access without reatriction despite what 2nd Amendment nuts believe. Even Antonin Scalia didn't believe that the 2nd Amendment allowed a free-for-all on assualt rifles.
If you support a standing military, then you're standing against America. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to prevent this "instrument of tyranny" by supporting well-regulated militias composed of armed citizens. But now that we have a standing military, the 2nd amendment is kind of obsolete if you think about it.
Except they aren't talking about 'Assault Rifles', or as they are more commonly called... 'machine guns'... which are already heavily regulated.
'Assault Weapons' are the made up term they use today, which encompasses primarily cosmetic features... unless you want to get to the point of cracking down on all semi-automatic handguns... which at last check SCOTUS has ruled a constitutional right to be able to own.
Except the rifles which the left seeks to ban mostly shoot 223... which on average is about half the weight as say... my 270 deer rifle. Both fire a round at about the same speed, however my 270 has about 2x as much muzzle energy.
Take this comparison of a 223 vs 30-06 against a pair of watermelons: the not at all scary looking 'hunting rifle' has far better wide hole leaving abilities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Also a curious ruling when reminded of the following bit from the wikipedia article on the ruling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Well don't tell the urbanites, but hunting rifles are basically sniper rifles. But keep it under your hat or we'll have California dems trying to ban high end optics.
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
It's got to do with the speed of the bullet and how it tears through flesh leaving a wide hole).
Where do you get your information? Everything in that sentence is wrong.
from the guy down the street selling them for $100 bucks a pop. Use it for a one time kill/assassination.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Those files were either
A) also potentially in violation until this administrative court ruling or
B) not covered under this rule as those plans are not compatible with a computer controlled mill or 3D printer
The DOJ ruled that a computer readable file to produce certain kinds of firearms violated the regulations under ITAR. This was flawed from the start, as you imply, as these were already plans in human readable form that have been printed and spread by electronic means in human readable form since the 1960s or perhaps even earlier.
Human readable forms of plans for automatic weapons has not, to my knowledge, been restricted. Same goes for plans to create nuclear weapons, there was an earlier court case on that. 1000 Internet points for the first person that can provide a link to a web page detailing the court case that decided it was legal to print nuclear weapons plans and distribute them to the public.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
If you don't mind it exploding in your hand when you target practice. I can think of a million better/more useful things to make with a 3D printer than an unreliable, dangerous, inaccurate, single-shot, plastic "gun".
Also, just because you can make it yourself doesn't mean it is legal to do so, or possess it, or carry it, or use it.
One pleasant surprise from the last election is that gun rights are now safe for decades to come - by some estimates, 25 to 40 years.
Also, it was pointed out that gun rights lobbies have not pressed gun ownership issues to the supreme court in recent decades because it would have resulted in a tossup decision (making precedent that would be very hard to overturn). Now that we have seated actual constitutionalists, the expectation is that after Ruth Bader Ginsburg(*) retires and Trump appoints the next justice, we will see some push back on gun control that gets settled by the supremes, making precedent that will be hard to overturn in the future.
And lest there be wailing and gnashing-of-teeth from the Left and/or Democrats about this, note that supreme court picks were floated as the most important issue in the last election, said issue going largely unheard amid the torrent of character assassination.
And also, in the first months of 2016, the Democratic Party moved $60 million from down-ballot races to the Clinton campaign to combat Bernie Sanders in the primary, Bernie having raised $40 million to Clinton's $20 million(**). That action did three things:
1) It gave the election to Republicans, because Bernie would have won against Trump
2) It alienated the Bernie supporters, many of whom stayed home or voted against the party candidate
3) It impoverished all the down-ballot races, which allowed Republicans to take those races/seats as well
So we're back to "you are responsible for your own distress", and "if you don't like it, field and vote for effective leaders that a majority of Americans can get behind", and "otherwise shut the fuck up because we're tired of all your shit!".
It's not like you didn't have a fair and equal chance of getting your way the first time.
(*) Who I personally admire, and respect her views on human rights
(**) How this is not a violation of FEC rules I don't know. At the time everyone was saying "It's a private organization, they can do whatever they want".
Looking at the murder rate in US. Damn it, you are really pussies, so many guns and still failing that much at self defense.
School shooting; you PASS with honor!
19 warning shots in the back by cops: you PASS with honor!
Can shooting: you PASS with honor!
Shopping for vegetables with AK-44: you PASS with honor!
Self-defense: you FAIL!
Are the guys in charge of self-defense blind or what? Or maybe, just pussies, hiding behind guns, believing everybody is retarded.
Not really, since the point was that the citizens of the country should have the tools to revolt against a tyrannical government - which would most obviously use the military it controls for its own survival purposes.
Are not Americans mostly of European descent?
The left in US is far right for most European. You seem never having set a feet outside the states. Childish.
Reaching back a bit, but Korean shopowners used them very effectively to defend their shops/homes during the Rodney King riots.
Not only does it make people not respect the political left,...
Who are you trying to convince that there is any 'left" in US politics?
What you actually have is two corporate controlled sides of the same coin.
You make a good point. Plus, MAGA hat wearing school shooters are probably not really equipped to 3D-print anything, since they need buttons like "POPCORN" on their microwaves or they wouldn't be able to figure out how to use them. Plus, it much easier just to go down to the local Florida Guns'n'Liquor drive-thru and pick up an AR-15 and a 12-pack of PBR.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Old joke but true.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Don't you oppress him with your accurate definitions.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
It's videos like that which demonstrate the lie that is the "assault weapon". The gun grabbers say they want to take those "evil weapons of war" from the public but leave us with our hunting rifles. That's a lie and if they know anything about rifles or hunting then they know it's a lie. So either they are ignorant or they assume the people are ignorant.
Oh, and an "assault rifle" is a real thing. An assault rifle is a weapon capable of switching between single shot with each trigger pull (semi-automatic) and multiple shots per trigger pull (burst or fully-automatic). To the DOJ anything that is capable of firing more than one cartridge with a pull of a trigger is a "machine gun". A shotgun fires multiple projectiles with each pull of the trigger but that does not make it a machine gun so long as all the projectiles are in a single cartridge. There are air guns that can fire multiple projectiles but since the projectiles are not contained in a cartridge that is also not a machine gun. State laws vary on this such as my own where any "dangerous weapon" is categorized along with firearms, so even pepper spray or a taser needs a permit to carry concealed.
The definition of an assault weapon varies by state. There was a big deal made about some insane person murdering schoolchildren with an "assault weapon" which was a lie. Assault weapons, by their definition, are banned and so no one has committed a mass murder in a school with an assault weapon as defined in that state. Now that we've seen a handful of murders done with handguns and pump action shotguns it seems, to me at least, the concept of the "assault weapon" is fading. Banning shotguns will not go over well, and finally people are discussing things that will actually stop murders such as armed guards at schools.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
It isn't inherently military. What makes an AR-15 military?
most of the murders are committed in areas which have harsh gun laws. like Chicago for example. Oh and don't forget LA.
Everything in your post is wrong. That's impressive.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
We're not that far from full fab units tnat can replicate themselves.
You'll still need to buy the electronics, but metal and plastic and feeds for preexisting parts are all there.
Aka download plans, visit Radio Shack with a shopping list, and push a button. Drone.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Also VERY IMPORTANT point. If you are legally able to buy/own a firearm (AK, AR, BB gun, Shotgun, Pistol, etc). You are 100% legally able to build yourself one or 100 of them.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/q...
Does an individual need a license to make a firearm for personal use?
No, a license is not required to make a firearm solely for personal use. However, a license is required to manufacture firearms for sale or distribution. The law prohibits a person from assembling a non–sporting semiautomatic rifle or shotgun from 10 or more imported parts, as well as firearms that cannot be detected by metal detectors or x–ray machines. In addition, the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and advance approval by ATF.
[18 U.S.C. 922(o), (p) and (r); 26 U.S.C. 5822; 27 CFR 478.39, 479.62 and 479.105]
The Obama era ATF tried to add ITAR/Non-Sporting BS to home built guns as a back door prohibition/ban.
ATF FAQs
Does an individual need a license to make a firearm for personal use?
No, a license is not required to make a firearm solely for personal use. However, a license is required to manufacture firearms for sale or distribution. The law prohibits a person from assembling a non–sporting semiautomatic rifle or shotgun from 10 or more imported parts, as well as firearms that cannot be detected by metal detectors or x–ray machines. In addition, the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and advance approval by ATF.
[18 U.S.C. 922(o), (p) and (r); 26 U.S.C. 5822; 27 CFR 478.39, 479.62 and 479.105]
It's not about the size of each hole, it's about how quickly you can put holes in lots of things with accuracy.
Did you click the link on the parent site?
http://thehomegunsmith.com/
Did you notice the giant UK flag at the top?
It's very likely that this site isn't hosted in a location where a US court has much jurisdiction. Contrary to popular belief, Americans are not the only people interested in firearms.
My UID is prime and so is this number: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0.
These plastic guns though... how many children can you murder before it breaks?
Then bring more than one.
These plastic guns are small, light, and cost very little. It shouldn't be that difficult to carry multiple plastic guns.
That's the important bit. I mean, if you're a psychopath that has to surround yourself with guns to feel safe, who knows what could set you off, so you really need that information while you're relatively rational.
Rational adults need to realize very soon that gun control laws of any kind will not keep children safe. What keeps children safe are armed rational adults.
Irrational law: Felons are barred from owning a firearm.
Rational law: Those that cannot be trusted to possess a firearm need to be confined to prison or a mental health facility.
Irrational law: Parents are barred from being armed while picking up their children from school.
Rational law: Weapons are to be on the parents in a proper holster, not left in a vehicle or at home.
I'll see armed men driving armored trucks to bring cash to an ATM. We'll also have our children in buses driven by unarmed drivers and maybe with an unarmed "security officer" on the bus. We're fine with guarding money with lethal force but not our children? That's a fucked up world we live in.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Bullshit.
Oh good, if America is so well protected we should be able to redirect the billions in defense spending to more productive use.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Oh man, what a great joke!
What?
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Flint was fucked long ago.
they're being pretty specific. It's a class of rifle with larger (20+ round) magazines and low velocity rounds designed to leave a large (usually fatal) wound. That's what makes them "Assault" rifles. Words really do have meaning here. Your hunting rifle might have the wounding power but it doesn't have enough rounds to rack up kills. The lower weight of an Assault rifle is a nice touch too.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
also several articles about the design of the AR-15 and similar rifles.
Fact is the rest of the world doesn't have mass shootings all the time. Or any kind of shootings for that matter. You can blame culture, but we're not going to change that. You can blame medical care, but nobody wants to pay for that. So what's left? Gun regulations. I can't drive a car over a certain tonnage w/o a commercial license but I can buy just about anything up to and including a grenade launcher (I cant' get the ammo, but really it's not hard to make).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
"Wild hyperbole like that is why fewer and fewer people take the Left seriously about anything any more."
Keep thinking that please. Trump has just named a supreme court justice who is likely to help role back abortion and gay marriage which are two issues a current and growing majority of Americans support. American conservatives are currently on the winning end of losing fights just like they once were with slavery and civil rights.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Please cite your sources for the political affiliation of school shooters.
That is appositely incorrect. The 5.56x45mm round is significantly faster than the older and larger military round like 7.62x51mm (.308) round that was used in older designs like the M14, which is what preceded the adoption of the M16. The whole reason why the US military and NATO went to 5.56 because the ammunition was lighter and cheaper than the ammunition they used to use. And even then, the military still do use weapons chambered in 7.62 for selected purposes. Like designated marksmen or sniper duty.
It's why we've never been successfully invaded by a conquering force, while most European capitals sit atop Roman ruins, and one strata above that, hastily-buried Nazi party armbands.
Hmm, so my .30-06 single shot is an "assault rifle"? Because it can put a bullet downrange with the same sort of muzzle speed as an AR-15, and it will make a MUCH bigger hole than an AR-15 does.
Or my Lee Enfield. Yeah, it can be handloaded to the same sort of muzzle speeds as an AR-15. 100 year-old rifle, but an Assault Rifle! Way cool!
Note, by the by, that an AK-47 (or the semi-auto civilian version) does NOT have a terribly high muzzle speed. More like a .30-30 than a .30-06.
Note also that your definition of an Assault Rifle is based on absolutely no knowledge of the subject. Assault rifles were developed and used by the military because they allow soldiers to carry more ammo. Smaller ammo means easier to carry lots and lots of bullets. And a wounded soldier is generally just as out of it as a dead one....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Lets put it this way, if you went nuts, which would you choose if you wanted to put a lot of holes in a crowd of people at fairly close range?
The bolt action is absolutely the correct choice for a single target at 100 yards.
The "invaders" will be those brainwashed by Russian PR. They are already here and coincidentally, they are gun owners. Putin knows there will never be a Red Dawn, to many guns. So in true KGB style he is using our own strength against us by turning it to his desires. #MAGA
To be fair, he was featured in a San Diego Padres shirt, so we should look into banning baseball bats. Anyway, again, well done!
Don't have links to a court case but in -93 the single of Here comes the war by the British band The New Model Army at least caused some controversy by including a simple diagram for an atomic bomb in the inlay http://www.newmodelarmy.org/in...
Nice to see you wearing your nazi brand on your sleeve these days instead of hiding it.
The majority of people going nuts and shooting people en-masse choose a fairly close range and rapid firing. They don't tend to be the sort of people who practice seriously enough that they would be any more accurate with a bolt action rifle. There are exceptions, of course, but unless we want to ban butter knives, there needs to be a cut-off somewhere.
I have mixed feelings about that approach, but there is some logic to the thought.
It's a high powered semi automatic rifle based on the M4?
I am still waiting for the mass shooting where the victims had guns.
Has yet to happen. Not at all surprisingly the victims never have weapons. Except oh wait all the times so,done nearby had a gun the shooter was stopped like the gay bar in Florida where the local cowboy shot the murderous America hating Muslim and saved a bunch more gay guys.
But never let facts get in the way of good lefty snark.
It's a small high velocity round that fractures on impact, creating more damage.
Are you the kind of dumbass who prefers a completely unarmed citizenry like in Venezuela, China, and pretty much every violent oppressive dictatorship? You know.. where the people are essentially born into captivity and slaves of the state?
Yes. Yes, you are that kind of dumbass.
Maybe not, but we are accused of being the biggest gun fanatics. Meanwhile, you can't even have an air rifle over 12 ft/lbs without an FAC in the U.K.. They already lost the battle for gun rights.
ya know? If, for example, you've been shown to be too aggressive when driving or drive while drinking you lose your right to drive. Based on what I've seen on youtube involving Americans of a Southern persuasion, their guns and alcohol no such equivalent rules apply...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Ironically most gun murders are committed by members of demographics that predominately vote Democrat...so assuming that these individuals vote at all they likely vote Democrat
so do cars. We heavily regulate cars. Also, it's kinda hard to get a car into a school hall way. I mean, I've seen some enterprising young lads pull it off, but it's a lot of effort.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I'm pretty sure the left do not know the definition of semi-automatic. Or single action, double action, poi, ballistic coefficient, barrel harmonics, or even what the AR in ar-15 stands for.
Visit what now? Where is Radio Shacks? Is that by Toys R Us?
Actually a wounded soldier is more out of it than a dead one, because he'll tie up his buddies who are helping him, and tie up medical resources, etc, and the associated logistics.
In actual combat, most rounds are expended just keeping the other guys' heads down.
-- Alastair
What then is inherently military? Nuclear bombs? They can be used to redirect an asteroid aiming for earth, scientific research, and space travel. Artillery? Talk about fun! Plus I can do seriously quick mining with one of those. A tank? Useful for getting up the hill behind my house. Plus I gotta protect myself from home invaders. The term is inherently meaningless.
"The 2nd Amendment was never written with the notion that individuals should have military weapons"
How do you expect the American citizenry to deflect an invading force if they can't meet and match the firepower level of said invading force?
Asymmetrical warfare isn't something most Americans are capable of.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
"To be fair, he was featured in a San Diego Padres shirt, so we should look into banning baseball bats."
Ron Fowler (co-owner of the Padres) is a heavy Republican supporter.
Literally every single facet screams Republican.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
If somebody was going to invade the US, the people having an AR15 are going to do jack shit against it. If only because of the number of tank, jet fighter/bomber, drone and other military material, then a similarly composed army would need to take over the US. You think you could with the AR15 fight agaisnt that ? nope. Best you could do is the partisan fighting, IED, and ambush or lightly armored/lightly protected target. And hope the other guy don't have high caliber or precise weapon. And hope there is no swift retribution with a drone run on the local house from which the attack started , because by that point any civilian attacking an enemy with weapon would immediately qualify as armed force, and their house armed force headquarter with potentially "collateral damage" like the US army name them. Your fantasy of resisting a modern army with AR15 is just that. Look how well the latest conflict the locals resisted with their IED and AK47.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
The US has the distinct disadvantage it is very very wide. Sure , on the surface, one could believe it means a lot more army would be needed to invade, but the reality is that it means only a few soft target would be needed to cripple the US : if you target refinery, fuel depot, and energy infrastructure you cripple the US because of the distance it needs to travel. So your AR15 guys would face the problem they may have as many ar15 as they want, but they would be quickly isolated unable to travel far as an invading army would lock down fuel supply/energy supply. After a week or two the civilian would be unable to travel far , by fact that the US all places are far from each other. So basically you would be screwed.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Why are you trying to silence the school shooters? They are only trying to stand up for themselves to fight against the abuse they are suffering.
Support your local school shooter, give them your firearms.
The fact that you can does not make it legal.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
http://www.handgunlaw.us/state...
Don't be a moron.
I haven't seen Democrats this upset since the Republicans took away their slaves. You got yourself so worked up in a rabid madness you can't even make a proper insult.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
and finally people are discussing things that will actually stop murders such as armed guards at schools.
Are these armed guards supposed to be psychic? There is a point the "we need more good guys with guns" contingent seems to keep missing: Some kid shoots up a few students and then gets capped by an armed guard (or armed teacher) - that's still a school shooting.
If you actually want to keep guns out of schools, we've already figured this shit out at airports, courtrooms, and theme parks. Send everybody through a metal detector. Of course, some psycho could still shoot up the security queue, but technically you've kept guns out of the school, so not a school shooting.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
>"What then is inherently military?"
Remember their statement:
"The government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber -- including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms -- are not inherently military."
They just defined it, in reverse. It would be all automatic firearms, and firearms over .50 caliber. ANY firearm can or may be used by the military, but the previous sentence define those that are inherently military.
Your followup statements are out of bounds, since their definition only regards firearms. Nuclear bombs, tanks, etc, are not "firearms".
The Second Amendment Lives Again. And guess what More Is on the way as we make America Great Again.
So many comments that have nothing to do with the case. This was mainly a 1st. amendment decision and only a little of a 2nd. amendment case, even though it the plans were for a firearm. This will decision will have a affect on much more than just firearms.
Passionately Indifferent
Are these armed guards supposed to be psychic? There is a point the "we need more good guys with guns" contingent seems to keep missing: Some kid shoots up a few students and then gets capped by an armed guard (or armed teacher) - that's still a school shooting.
That is true, that would still be a mass murder at a school. The difference though is that instead of 20 dead there would be 5 dead. That's still an improvement, no?
The guards don't need to be psychic, they only need to be present. The reason schools are such targets is because the attackers know that there will be no one to resist them. Make it known that schools are guarded by good guys with guns and these maniacs are less likely to even attempt to kill children in a school. The best result of a gunfight is the one that didn't happen.
Here's what you seem to be missing, all mass murders stop when a good guy with a gun shows up. Maybe that person is wearing a uniform, maybe not. The murderer tends to keep killing until that good guy with a gun shows up. We can have those good guys with a gun on site as guards, or we can allow the murderers to keep murdering while the police are driving to the scene from miles away. Having the good guys with a gun in the schools may not mean the gun fight didn't happen but it does mean that the body count will be much lower.
Do you have a better idea?
If you actually want to keep guns out of schools, we've already figured this shit out at airports, courtrooms, and theme parks. Send everybody through a metal detector. Of course, some psycho could still shoot up the security queue, but technically you've kept guns out of the school, so not a school shooting.
Have you noticed anything about those people running the metal detectors? They have guns. I'm not sure what you think you've proven. Even if you've prevented a "school shooting" by having it happen on a sidewalk instead of in the school that didn't stop the murder. What stops the murdering is good guys with guns.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
One of the most famous quotes of Thomas Jefferson directly alludes to it.
the people can not be all, & always, well informed. the part which is wrong [. . .] will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. if they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. we have had 13. states independant 11. years. there has been one rebellion. that comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. what country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms. the remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. what signify a few lives lost in a century or two? the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. it is it’s natural manure.
Emphasis mine. http://tjrs.monticello.org/let...
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
you are missing the bigger picture. the government acknowledged that the AR-15 is NOT a military weapon. this blows up the narrative that the "ban assault weapons" crowd is using
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
the odds of being shot by another person as an innocent person in the states is less than winning the lottery.....
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
clearly they dont know anything, because it IS a sporting rifle.
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
You only need to print the lower receiver for an AR-15, and currently it'll take some filing and drilling to clean it up before installing the pins and trigger group. Everything else is available unrestricted over the counter or can be ordered legally online without using an FFL dealer. And polymer based lower receivers are already common. So it just depends how strong the 3D-printer filament is compared to the cast or CNC polymer that's already being used.
Trump has just named a supreme court justice who is likely to help role back abortion and gay marriage
The only people even talking about it are democrats
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Republicans ended slavery and were on the forefront of the civil rights movement. You've allowed yourself to be brainwashed.
Left / Right isn't strictly economics though. It's more of a social spectrum.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
BS. Please read Federalist 29.
And all guns in Chicago come from Indiana, which has very lax gun laws. Also, per capita, neither Chicago nor LA are even in the top 20 cities for murder rate. St. Louis, Baltimore, Detroit and New Orleans are the cities you are looking for. But by all means keep comparing total numbers against cities a quarter the size.
We all know that correlation is not causation (In any other story, just posting that sentence is a guaranteed +5). But if you had to guess at a causal relationship, do you really think that strict gun laws are a cause of gun violence or a reaction to gun violence? Maybe they aren't a *good* reaction (That's a separate topic), but they are a common reaction. I've never heard of an area with no gun problems (say a sparsely populated rural county) suddenly passing strict gun laws for no reason and then turning into a den of gang violence. Have you? I have heard of cities who are desperate to stop innocent victims from getting killed in drug violence passing gun laws. Those places are already borderline war zones. Now if it were up to me, I would give the drug dealers free firearms training so that when they go to shoot each other they stop missing and hitting kids. But that probably would be politically very difficult.
Ok, what makes the AR 15 so scary and non-civilian to you?
An AR is just a semi-automatic rifle. It doesn't shoot a particularly "powerful" round....it is basically a glorified .22 round, just at high velocity.
They are really no different than any other semi-automatic weapon that citizens have, they only look scary, the difference between an AR and any other semi-auto rifle are purely cosmetic.
Most all semi-auto rifles have removable magazines, fire one bullet per pull of the trigger, etc.
Most of the "assault weapon" bans they try to put through, can only target the AR by cosmetic features, not on functionality, because if they did...it would ban pretty much all modern firearms, including semi auto handguns (by the way, most murders/crime are committed with handguns).
The AR is just modular, meaning it is easier to hang things off it, flash lights, pop up sights, scopes....pistol grips. IN other words, nothing that really makes it any more dangerous that any other semi-automatic rifle.
To ban the AR, you have to ban semi-auto weapons for the most part, and I guess you're saying that US citizens shouldn't have anything more than a bolt action rifle, shotgun and less?
Do remember, back when the country formed....the musket WAS the "assault rifle" of the day, 100% on par with the military.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Actually, the 5.56/.223 Remington round the AR-15 uses is meant for varmints. It's considered not powerful enough to reliably and humanely hunt medium game (like deer and sheep). The .223 round is actually quite low powered.
It also isn't based on the M4. It predates the M4 by several decades.
Semi-auto just means that for every pull of the trigger, one round is fired.
So do you mean it's military style because it looks scary?
So, are you saying in the US we could ban ALL semi-auto weapons, and only have bolt action rifles, and go back to revolvers for pistols?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I'll take a guess: HuffPost, Salon, Vox, Mashable, Mic, (or any mag by their parent publishing houses); as well as CNN, MSNBC, ABC...
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
We can laugh at them now. The Supreme Court being secure, gun rights are secure for 50 years.
Neener gun grabbers, cry some more!
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Imagine that 10 years from now there are 3D printers that print really strong metal parts which can be assembled into a machine gun or similar. Then what?
Then people do exact what they do today, and assemble the strong metal parts into a working gun.
Or did you forget metalworking shops are common and it's dead easy to produce things like rifle barrels?
3D printing use will expand for sure but it's not like every home will have a 3D printer that can produce high quality metal and composite plastic parts. Instead it will just be really easy to order prints from more sophisticated printing facilities (just like you can order 3D stone prints today). But that's not very much different than today where you can also easily order gun parts online.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I have a perfect solution to the gun control debate - everyone gets to own a gun. But past a certain point of mental stability, you are *required* to 3D print in plastic) whatever guns you own.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
What an odd comment to make. At no point did I say a single thing about Republicans.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
http://bfy.tw/IzVA
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
A .308 does just fine. But don't let everyone know, you are right, they will try to find some way to ban them. Most hunters wouldn't even consider the classic round in an AR-15 to be a humane way to kill a deer.
Those aren't places with lax gun laws either so what is your point?
What part of mixed feelings was unclear?
Because the security queue is at the mall right? So its a mall shooting, which makes it ok so long as its not at a school. /s
Wouldn't that make a double-barrelled shotgun a machine gun?
Just for giggles one day I did some math comparing a Joe Biden approved double barrel shotgun to an "evil" machine gun. A double barrel 12 gauge shotgun loaded with 000 (triple aught) buckshot will fire 10 lead pellets of approximately 0.36 inch diameter with each pull of the trigger. You know what else can fire 10 lead pellets of approximately 0.36 inch diameter with a single pull of the trigger? The MAC-11, a machine gun under federal law and an "assault weapon" in many states. A shotgun pellet leaves the barrel at about 1200 feet per second, which is coincidentally about the same speed a .380 ACP bullet leaves the barrel of that MAC-11.
A double barrel shotgun will fire 20 lead pellets in a small cone with two pulls of the trigger, just like a MAC-11 could with a 20 round magazine and two short pulls of the trigger. A common inland bird shotgun will hold three 12 gauge shells, meaning 30 lead pellets. That's a lot like a MAC-11 with a 30 round magazine. Many shotguns for deer hunting and other uses will hold 5 or 6 shells, that's potentially 60 lead pellets of similar lethality of a MAC-11 with two 30 round magazines but not having to stop to reload.
Then there's the whole "armor piercing" ammunition crap that's tossed about. "You don't need armor piercing ammunition to hunt deer!" I saw a very interesting YouTube video comparing the ability of various rounds to defeat "bullet proof" glass. They started with several handgun rounds, and they did nothing to the glass. They moved on to several rifles rounds and at best they took a couple chips out of the glass. Then they fired a slug from a 12 gauge shotgun. After that they had to stop the test, that's because there was not enough left of the sample of bullet proof glass to continue. Where I live the law requires people to hunt deer with a shotgun slug. That means hunting deer with a weapon and ammunition capable of defeating "bullet proof" glass with a single shot.
That just demonstrates to me the lies that are behind gun control. I also have a new respect for the 12 gauge shotgun.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Did the rioters have predator drones and fighter/bomber jets? An "invasion" would, and handguns aren't going to deter such.
Hooray for the Bill of Rights.
I hear ya. I read a series a while ago that had the best nickname I've seen for M-16 and its NATO friendly ilk. Barbie Guns.
My comment was about ARs, but even so, you don't hold ground with preds and jets. You need boots and small arms are quite effective against them.
A .308 does just fine. But don't let everyone know, you are right, they will try to find some way to ban them. Most hunters wouldn't even consider the classic round in an AR-15 to be a humane way to kill a deer.
Nope, they are too small and won't guarantee a kill on something that large but they make great rounds for a ranch rifle. Funny throw the same bullets into a wood stock Mini-14 and it's suddenly not scary at all!
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
Make it known that schools are guarded by good guys with guns and these maniacs are less likely to even attempt to kill children in a school.
Deterrence only works when your adversary isn't a suicidal maniac.
Maybe that person is wearing a uniform, maybe not.
Unless you're suggesting the lunacy of arming other students, the "good guy with a gun" will be an adult. Unless they are psychic or have the fastest draw in the west, it's just likely they'll be the first target.
Having the good guys with a gun in the schools may not mean the gun fight didn't happen but it does mean that the body count will be much lower.
Minimizing casualties sounds good if we were talking about an armed conflict. However, we're talking about kids who are going to school, not into battle.
Have you noticed anything about those people running the metal detectors? They have guns.
That's the entire point - everyone with guns, good guys and bad guys, stay outside the security checkpoint. Again, this works for airports, courthouses, theme parks. The whole reason we're okay with kids getting shot up while they're trying to take a math test is because implementing security at every public school would simply be too expensive. It's just cheaper to let a few kids die every once in awhile. Ironically, this comes from the same politicians pushing a "pro life" agenda.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Those two letters do not stand in contrast to each other but rather complement each other. The overall interpretation between the two is that it does not matter if the people keep and bear arms. Welcome it because the Constitution of the United States contains within it the mechanisms by which to change it (amendments) without needing to resort to force to change the document. Nothing regarding the letter you referenced suggests that the people need not be armed or that rebellions aren't a good thing, simply that we have the option to change the Constitution without requiring bloodshed.
Note that the letter I provided dated after the letter to which you reference. I shall also present another letter that Jefferson wrote to Madison in January of 1787.
https://founders.archives.gov/...
It prevents the degeneracy of government, and nourishes a general attention to the public affairs. I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccesful rebellions indeed generally establish the incroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is a medecine necessary for the sound health of government.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
I got mixed up
The M16 is a variant of the AR15
The M4 is based off the M16
The AR15 is inherently military because the US Army used it. The have a service manual for it
https://www.at3tactical.com/pa...
It covers the M4, M16 and AR15 because they're all very similar.
That was a really interesting concession, because otherwise the government would've run afoul of U.S. v. Miller, which found that gun control was not a violation of rights if the weapon in question was not militarily useful.
That is a complete misreading of U.S. vs. Miller.
As you can see above, the Supreme Court hadn't been told that sawed off shotguns were regularly used in warfare. (See "trench guns" during WWI). If they had, they would have ruled it was a protected weapon because it would have had a "reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia"
That's OK though, even people who should know better get that wrong.
This is an ex-parrot!
Deterrence only works when your adversary isn't a suicidal maniac.
Agreed. A question though, how does not having armed responsible adults in the school improve the situation in the case of a suicidal maniac?
Unless you're suggesting the lunacy of arming other students, the "good guy with a gun" will be an adult. Unless they are psychic or have the fastest draw in the west, it's just likely they'll be the first target.
Agreed. Again, how does not having armed responsible adults in the school improve the situation in the case of someone murdering innocent children?
If the person is there to kill everyone in the building then disarming the responsible adults is lowering their survival chances from maybe 50/50 to very slim chances. It's quite likely the adults would be targeted first regardless, armed or not. A maintenance man charging the murderous fuck can maybe stop the maniac, slow him down enough that some kids could run away, because unarmed the maintenance man likely knows he's already dead, and the murderous fuck likely knows the math too. Arm this maintenance man and he's not on what is most likely a suicide mission any more, he's got a chance to shoot the fucker before he does more harm.
Minimizing casualties sounds good if we were talking about an armed conflict. However, we're talking about kids who are going to school, not into battle.
Minimizing casualties sounds good regardless of where we are. What the fuck are you smoking? You think it's a good idea to leave innocent children in a building with a murderer and just make a phone call and hope the police arrive before everyone is dead?
That's the entire point - everyone with guns, good guys and bad guys, stay outside the security checkpoint. Again, this works for airports, courthouses, theme parks. The whole reason we're okay with kids getting shot up while they're trying to take a math test is because implementing security at every public school would simply be too expensive. It's just cheaper to let a few kids die every once in awhile. Ironically, this comes from the same politicians pushing a "pro life" agenda.
Implementing armed security costs nothing. Parents, teachers, and probably that maintenance man, are willing to volunteer to get trained and armed at their own expense for defending our children. How do I know this? Because people have announced they'd be willing to do this. You want them to pass background checks first? Fine, make them pass the same checks as a person would need to be a school teacher, to purchase a firearm, carry a firearm in that state, or whatever has the highest standard. You want them trained? Fine, set the standard the same as the local police, for those carrying a concealed firearm, draw up something new, or whatever. It costs nothing to allow parents to guard the lives of their children in the school, all it takes is a state law allowing parents to do so. There is a federal gun free school zone law that sets a minimum standard for the nation and in that is the allowance for schools to allow armed guards as they determine is fitting. If the state determines a parent is fit to be an armed guard then federal law allows it.
Here's the thing, states are now writing such laws. We are seeing volunteers show up to guard children in schools. They've had background checks, they've had training, and it costs nothing.
There is no reason to leave innocent children in a free fire zone for some murderous fuck to kill them all unopposed until a good guy with a gun happens to show up.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
I was getting at, high crime rate: Lets ban guns! > Unarmed citizens & Armed criminals.
If you stand against the right of Americans to bear arms then you're standing against America
If you support a standing military, then you're standing against America. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to prevent this "instrument of tyranny" by supporting well-regulated militias composed of armed citizens. But now that we have a standing military, the 2nd amendment is kind of obsolete if you think about it.
At the time the Constitution was written, there was a standing military, and there had been since the end of the Revolution:
The first Congress of the United States under the Constitution (March, 1789) found already in existence a "Frontier Corps" of infantry 700 strong, and a battalion of four companies of artillery.
According to Heitman's "Historical Register of the U. S. Army," one of these companies (Doughty's) was retained in service from the Revolutionary army: one (Douglass') was raised under Resolve of Congress of date June 3, 1784; and two were organized under Resolve of Congress of date October 20, 1786, when the four companies were organized into a battalion under Major John Doughty. - The Army of the US, article by William l. Haskin.
The standing army was not only in existence before the Constitution was written, it would continue in existence after the Bill of Rights was ratified. Congress would pass the "Establishment of the Troops" law at the very end of its 1789 session, at which time the standing army was around 800 members.
Further, nothing in the Constitution prohibits a standing military, the only consideration is that appropriations for the Army (not the Navy) have to be renewed every two years.
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy; - Article I, Section 8.
Also, the 3rd Amendment wouldn't make sense if there couldn't be a military in time of peace (and hence a standing army):
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
If there can't be a standing military, then there wouldn't be any situation in which soldiers could be quartered in a home - without consent - in time of peace.
In other words, the 2nd Amendment was written in a historical context in which there was (and would continue to be) a standing military; hence, the militia was seen as something that existed in addition to the standing military.
In short, you're jumping to conclusions that aren't supported by the historical data.
The biggest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing people that the AR-15 is a "modern sporting rifle".
Law enforcement calls them "patrol rifles" now.
Looking at the murder rate in US. Damn it, you are really pussies, so many guns and still failing that much at self defense.
And now consider the murder rate without those 3 million self defense shootings.
What about homicide by other weapons? Does the availability of firearms somehow explain the number of knifings and people being killed by blunt force trauma?
I am still waiting for the mass shooting where the victims had guns.
A civilian with a firearm will never preventing a mass shooting. If they did prevent it, then it would not be mass shooting. And if there was a mass shooting, then they failed to prevent it.
Minimizing casualties sounds good regardless of where we are. What the fuck are you smoking? You think it's a good idea to leave innocent children in a building with a murderer and just make a phone call and hope the police arrive before everyone is dead?
If we can't (or are unwilling to) fix the problems in society which lead to a kid blowing a fuse and shooting up their school every so often, keeping guns out of schools is the next best thing (security checkpoints, not "Gun Free Zone" signs). You think it's a good idea to leave innocent children in a building with a murderer and hope they're lucky enough to not end up as "acceptable casualties" before the good guy with a gun takes out the bad guy?
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Lets put it this way, if you went nuts, which would you choose if you wanted to put a lot of holes in a crowd of people at fairly close range?
The bolt action is absolutely the correct choice for a single target at 100 yards.
Very few rifles of any type have a maximum point blank range *under* 100 yards. Most have a MPBR of 200 to 300 yards and even pistol caliber rifles extend to 150 yards.
So the advantages of a bolt action are very marginal at 100 yards and practically any type of rifle in good working order is sufficient at that range.
Trump has just named a supreme court justice who is likely to help role back abortion and gay marriage which are two issues a current and growing majority of Americans support.
And if the Democrats had not spent 100 years undermining federalism and states rights, this would not be a problem. Of course the Republicans helped also; federalism is only good when the other party is in power.
But there is a lot more to it than the drop. You may notice that the mass shootings are more of the pray and spray variety. Not exactly a good fit for bolt action.
Was the first AR-15 made by ArmaLite designed for military use? Yes. ArmaLite ran into financial trouble and sold the patents and trademarks to Colt.
Was the first AR-15 made by ArmaLite ever used by the US military? Technically yes, as it was field tested and not yet accepted by the military it was still called the AR-15. When it was accepted it was classed the M16A1, Colt ramped up production and sold the M16A1 to the US military. The original AR-15 was for all intents and purposes the M16A1.
Are AR-15s you can buy now the same rifle as the original ones? No. When the original AR-15 was reclassed the M16A1, Colt, still having the trademark on AR-15, named the police/civilian versions AR-15. M16A1 is a select fire full auto or burst fire rifle. The civilian AR-15 is a semi-auto rifle.
I can understand the confusion because Colt, wanting to keep using the trademark they already paid for, reused the AR-15 name. That said, all AR-15s after that initial testing phase, were never manufactured for military use.
Just because someone disagrees with your idea on how a schools should be secured does not mean one is unwilling or unable to secure the schools.
Metal detectors cost money, armed volunteers cost nothing. No one is leaving children in a building with a murderer in either case. All you are doing, by your own admission, is shifting the target rich environment from inside the school to the students waiting outside the school to get through the metal detectors. You, YOU, admitted that the students would be outside and unguarded while waiting to get through security, therefore leaving them vulnerable to a mass murderer. Get them in the school, do it quickly, and if someone goes ape shit and tries killing innocent children then they'd have to go through locked doors and armed guards to do it. It doesn't require metal detectors to keep schools safe, and keeping armed guards only at the perimeter of the school, even with metal detectors, means someone that breaks that layer of security leaves them alone in the school with helpless children and unarmed adults.
You mentioned earlier that airports and courtrooms keep armed security outside the "gun free zone" inside. That's a lie. There are armed guards inside this "gun free zone". It's not a gun free zone, the guards still have guns. You might not see them but they have guns. The only exception that I know of in this is prisons, the guards in the walls don't have guns. The guards on top of the walls have guns though.
You want metal detectors at school doors? Fine, you do that. You can pay for them. While you go about raising funds we can have armed volunteers in no time and with no funding.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
>"It is also legal to possess a firearm you make yourself, to carry a firearm you make yourself, to use a firearm you make yourself. "
Not if you are a felon or fall under other laws that prevent you from possessing or carrying a firearm. That was my point. It is not the act of MAKING it that might be illegal, but HAVING it might be, depending on who and where you are.
Here is just Federal: https://www.justice.gov/sites/... (section 1)
I don't really know what a '/k/' is exactly in this context. But everything I have said is common information.
It's about lynch-mob NGOs that come in the night, with the tacit support of sheriffs and courts who look the other way.
It's about dying with dignity rather than dying like victims, thinking here of Warsaw and Auschwitz.
It's about standing against collectivist fanatics who do not value the individual, thinking here of Cambodia's killing fields.
"There is no god but allah" - well, they got it half right.